Jump to content
A_Gorilla

Its 1993, you're in charge of the Jag, what do you do?

Recommended Posts

Well the 7800 was rushed accuatly, I don't now if anyone knows but it had exzactly the same sound chip as the 2600, no joke.

 

 

ah...ignorance is bliss, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok to back my statement up, 1 I'm not a troll (for the for-seeable future), 2 I am no longer suffering personal problems, but cut to the chase... Watch MN12BIRD's review of the 7800 on youtube, and it will tell you the 7800 has the same sound chip as the 2600, from personal experinace on my 7800 though, I think the sounds better on the 7800 anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok to back my statement up, 1 I'm not a troll (for the for-seeable future), 2 I am no longer suffering personal problems, but cut to the chase... Watch MN12BIRD's review of the 7800 on youtube, and it will tell you the 7800 has the same sound chip as the 2600, from personal experinace on my 7800 though, I think the sounds better on the 7800 anyway.

 

 

It's not the hardware question, but rather why you think that it has that sound hardware.

 

I think people know that the 7800 uses a TIA for sound. What you didn't seem to know is *why* it did.

 

Now back to the Jaguar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jaguar 64 is history, bring on the jaguar 256....gimme gimme gimme

 

You do know that the 7800 was pokey compatible didn't you Drac (ofcourse you did)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You do know that the 7800 was pokey compatible didn't you Drac (ofcourse you did)

 

Yes. The reason why it's not there is space and cost. They were using a 2800 case (to save costs as well) and there wasn't really room so the idea was to have sound in carts to bolster TIA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't the place to discuss this (there's a couple 7800 threads active on this topic as well), but I think the reason the sound was wired to the cart port at the last minut for an on-cart chip, instead of putting a POKEY (or something else) on the board was MARIA was supposed to have included sound capabilities as well, but it ended up getting cut out. In a practical sense, even putting a POKEY on a riser board (with later revisions integrating it of course, particularly had a low cost, sound-only, min-pokey been developed) is a lot better than adding chips to cartridges. Once you make saizable runs of a couple titles including the POKEY you've already used more than you would in the system it's self.

 

It really doesn't make sense in a practical manner. (had no alternative been available it might have made sense, but as POKEY was certainly available it doesn't, even the much smaller, though less capable, SN76489 should have been a consideration -though an Atari owned chip would have cost advantages even if it was more expensive to produce as there's no middle man to deal with)

 

 

As to the topic at hand, I think it's pretty clear that the simplest change to make to help the Jag would be swapping the 68k for a 68EC020 runing at J-RISC speed. There are plenty of other options for harware alterations, some (like elliminating the 68k) necessitate better tools to be produced, and others that can be done in addition to changing/removing the 68k. (like double buffering the blitter or fixing the MMU bugs -the latter probably being important enough to consider the next thing to change) And finally if it should be CD based form the start without being unreasonably expensive. (you might be able to keep it under $350 with the 020 and a 1x CD drive, but that might be pushing it) It certainly has the advantage in being attractive to developers as a cheaper medium with far more storage capacity, so the games are cheaper to produce and can be sold at a lower price and higher profit margin. Of course CD's emphesize the limited RAM of the Jag a bit more, but it should still get by. (and the overall advantages of the media trump this) Maybe speeding up the system from 26.6 MHz to arround 33 MHz as well, again as a minor concern. (after the MMU, probably along the same priority as double buffering)

 

Seeing as the lack of software for the system was it's biggest problem, and using CD's would help this as well, that's another pluss in this respect. Even if the unit is farly expensive initially (though still far less than the 3DO) a nice launch lineup of CD based games would compensate. (again as long as it's not rediculously expensice and hase acceptable advertizing and distribution)

 

 

jaguar 64 is history, bring on the jaguar 256....gimme gimme gimme

 

Woha, don't start brining that bits BS back in, it left the market early into the 6th gen and it should stay that way, there are no current "256-bit" ystems (inless you're talking about data paths, even then that's going to be uncommon outside the graphics bus) Just no, most current gen systems indeed have 32-bit cores in their CPUs, even PC's only recently started to really shift toward 64-bit CPUs and OS's (with a 64-bit proc with a 32-bit OS still acting like a 32-bit proc). (granted we've had 64-bit CPU data buses since the original Pentium)

 

Still, the (often erronius, gimicky, and inconsistant) "bitness" hype died in the manstream console market, so please let it RIP. :|

Edited by kool kitty89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction, both the 360 and PS3 use 64-bit cores. (along with some 128-bit registers too, in the PS3's case most of it's cores are only 128-bit) but still, no 256-bit. ;) (and the Wii's is 32-bit) They use a fixed 32-bit RISC instruction set, but that has nothing to do with the cores themselves, the Super H series (in 32x, Saturn, and Dreamcast to name consoles) uses 16-bit fixed length instructions, but they are most definitely 32-bit processors. (the SH4 of the Dreamcast additionally using a 64-bit data bus, though this has nothing to due with the core itsself, just the data bandwidth)

 

And yeah a lot of the hardware really doesn't have "bitness" to it, like the Jag CD. (though I'm sure there are controller/processor chips in both the VR set and the Jag CD which do have "bitness" too...) not that that would add anything to the games themselves, it's just to support the devices. The Saturn for example has a 32-bit RISC SH-1 as it's CD-ROM controller.

Edited by kool kitty89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well some aspect of computing have moved on from bits, to MIPS and FLOPS and Pflops etc

 

is this where the jag's headed...to the bleeding bleeding edge of 'no where'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Correction, both the 360 and PS3 use 64-bit cores. (along with some 128-bit registers too, in the PS3's case most of it's cores are only 128-bit) but still, no 256-bit. ;) (and the Wii's is 32-bit) They use a fixed 32-bit RISC instruction set, but that has nothing to do with the cores themselves, the Super H series (in 32x, Saturn, and Dreamcast to name consoles) uses 16-bit fixed length instructions, but they are most definitely 32-bit processors. (the SH4 of the Dreamcast additionally using a 64-bit data bus, though this has nothing to due with the core itsself, just the data bandwidth)

 

And yeah a lot of the hardware really doesn't have "bitness" to it, like the Jag CD. (though I'm sure there are controller/processor chips in both the VR set and the Jag CD which do have "bitness" too...) not that that would add anything to the games themselves, it's just to support the devices. The Saturn for example has a 32-bit RISC SH-1 as it's CD-ROM controller.

 

 

Jaguar two also had 64/128 bit registeres. The blitter was capable of multibuffered 64 bit read and write SIMULTANIOUSLY!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If only the Jaguar was a sucsess... p.s don't tell any blatent lies or it'll be classed as trolling.

 

Huhh :? ??? :?: :?: :?:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If only the Jaguar was a sucsess... p.s don't tell any blatent lies or it'll be classed as trolling.

 

 

Which lies would that be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK.on Topic. Since stock speculation was so great at the time Atari should have spun off Jaguar as a different company. Told the public Jag was the next great thing.(Internet Gaming) and done a great big IPO (as many did) (Amazon didn't make money for years). Then used the cash ala Microsoft not only to advertise but to purchase a well known software maker or two. Maybe from 3rd party Sega or a certain company that calls itself Atari now. ;)

 

Can't be worse than it turned out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ataarian63 I'm not sure what you're getting at, do you mean create a subsidiary or partner company specifically to build the Jag through and then going public, using the stock market to get the necessary funding? (the very thing Bushnel's Atari had considdered and dissmessed at the time in favoe of a merger -with Warner- due to the poor stock market at the time)

Was it a good time to do this, in terms of the economy in 1993?

Furthemore, with Atari's computer market drying up what would they do, act as a holding company and continue to support the Lynx possibly along with sone legacy support for their computers?

 

 

 

On the topic of hardware again I got thinking. It's been mentioned that using ARM or MIPS (the latter used in the CoJag) processors to replace the 68k would be too expensive (some ARM's like the 3DO's would also still be speed limited and lack cache), while building another J-RISC would take further development, and just like the 68k-less proposition, having good tools for the JRISC's would be key. What about other chips on the market, it was mentioned already that Intel chips would not work with the current interface (and adapting it would be expensive, and using such a CISC processor would still not be advantageous over the comperable 68k series (ie the 020), especiallt the 386 which lacks an onboard cache.

However, another commercially produced RISC chip might warrent consideration, especially one optimized for low cost consumer applications; what if a Hitachi SH2 (ie Saturn and 32x) was used in place of the 68000? Would the interface have supported it or have been practical to modify for it?

 

As I understand it, the SH2 would be significantly cheaper than the aformantioned ARM or MIPS chips, was powerful, with a decent amount of onboard RAM (4K cache of which 2K was able to be used as scratchpad RAM), and with tools already available as with the other comercial chips (granted not as common as something likt eh 68k archetecture), and easily able to run as fast as the current J-RISCs (I beleive it was limited to 28.7 MHz, at least the early models)

 

I beleive it became availabe in 1993, so it would be new, but still proctical for the timeframe. (an SH1 would not be a good option, as I think it was limited to 20 MHz at this time, was less cycle efficient than the SH2, and lacked the onboard cache)

Edited by kool kitty89

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ataarian63 I'm not sure what you're getting at, do you mean create a subsidiary or partner company specifically to build the Jag through and then going public, using the stock market to get the necessary funding? (the very thing Bushnel's Atari had considdered and dissmessed at the time in favoe of a merger -with Warner- due to the poor stock market at the time)

Was it a good time to do this, in terms of the economy in 1993?

Furthemore, with Atari's computer market drying up what would they do, act as a holding company and continue to support the Lynx possibly along with sone legacy support for their computers?

 

 

 

On the topic of hardware again I got thinking. It's been mentioned that using ARM or MIPS (the latter used in the CoJag) processors to replace the 68k would be too expensive (some ARM's like the 3DO's would also still be speed limited and lack cache), while building another J-RISC would take further development, and just like the 68k-less proposition, having good tools for the JRISC's would be key. What about other chips on the market, it was mentioned already that Intel chips would not work with the current interface (and adapting it would be expensive, and using such a CISC processor would still not be advantageous over the comperable 68k series (ie the 020), especiallt the 386 which lacks an onboard cache.

However, another commercially produced RISC chip might warrent consideration, especially one optimized for low cost consumer applications; what if a Hitachi SH2 (ie Saturn and 32x) was used in place of the 68000? Would the interface have supported it or have been practical to modify for it?

 

As I understand it, the SH2 would be significantly cheaper than the aformantioned ARM or MIPS chips, was powerful, with a decent amount of onboard RAM (4K cache of which 2K was able to be used as scratchpad RAM), and with tools already available as with the other comercial chips (granted not as common as something likt eh 68k archetecture), and easily able to run as fast as the current J-RISCs (I beleive it was limited to 28.7 MHz, at least the early models)

 

I beleive it became availabe in 1993, so it would be new, but still proctical for the timeframe. (an SH1 would not be a good option, as I think it was limited to 20 MHz at this time, was less cycle efficient than the SH2, and lacked the onboard cache)

Something along those lines or an independent company since Atari had sullied it's rep a bit. There were many scam IPO's in the 90's. Why not a good IPO like the jag. Jaguar Corp. if you will.Selling it as made by IBM wouldnt hurt either.Remember this is marketing we are talking about. Also the internet marketing aspect would have to be added. As you will remember people invested heavily on speculation that anything internet related was going to be the next great thing. In other word 2 companies. If successful Jag corp now owning a couple good developers and having success in the marketplace buys Atari for $1 and now one company again or just an asset purchase.Atari could be used to market legacy items or develop new budget gaming or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look all I'm saying is that it was a shame that the Jaguar failed cos it was a awsome system. Also, I must advice not tell any blatent lies on this blog, or It'll be classed as trolling, of coarse when you're high on drugs and ravaged by personal problems... oh forget it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look all I'm saying is that it was a shame that the Jaguar failed cos it was a awsome system. Also, I must advice not tell any blatent lies on this blog, or It'll be classed as trolling, of coarse when you're high on drugs and ravaged by personal problems... oh forget it!

 

My prays are with you dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I beleive it became availabe in 1993, so it would be new, but still proctical for the timeframe. (an SH1 would not be a good option, as I think it was limited to 20 MHz at this time, was less cycle efficient than the SH2, and lacked the onboard cache)

 

The SH2 would have been a very nice host but the 020 would have been still much more widely known. I would have

not complained with an SH2 though... they have very robust instruction sets. The other issue is the Tom and Jerry

were designed with the 68k series in mind even though they were capable of both big and little endian host CPU's.

The pin connections were designed for 68k but was adaptable for any chip with more costly PAL logic needed to

emulated certain signals. The 020 would have been less costly overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How cheap were SH2's - and would Atari have known about them? Also how would they have improved Trevor McFur or Raiden - I could see that CyberMorph might run more smoothly, but that was already the most impressive game technically at launch.

It's a real shame that Atari didn't have a killer arcade conversion at launch - Mortal Kombat II had just come out in the Arcades, and a Jaguar version could have been exact if Atari had invested in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How cheap were SH2's - and would Atari have known about them? Also how would they have improved Trevor McFur or Raiden - I could see that CyberMorph might run more smoothly, but that was already the most impressive game technically at launch.

It's a real shame that Atari didn't have a killer arcade conversion at launch - Mortal Kombat II had just come out in the Arcades, and a Jaguar version could have been exact if Atari had invested in it.

 

 

Any 32 bit processor with an internal cache(even a small one like the 020) would have made a great improvemnt for other games that suffered in

frame rate such as HoverStrike, I-War, Cybermorph. Even later games like SkyHammer and even WTR would have had better frame rates with a

faster processor running at full clock and 32 bits with internal dynamic caching. Im telling you that the 68k even used sparingly can cause serious

bottle neck. It caches nothing, runs at half system speed and only 1/4 the bus width.

 

I think however that SH2's were probably more expensive than 020's were...not 100% though( the 68EC020 was a cheaper version than a normal

020 as it only used 24 bit addressing(which is no detriment for Jaguar anyway.)) Even a 68010 would have had a few bytes prefetch RAM and would

have shown a small but noticable performance boost. When you tie up the bus, you destroy the performance of Tom and Jerry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How cheap were SH2's - and would Atari have known about them? Also how would they have improved Trevor McFur or Raiden - I could see that CyberMorph might run more smoothly, but that was already the most impressive game technically at launch.

It's a real shame that Atari didn't have a killer arcade conversion at launch - Mortal Kombat II had just come out in the Arcades, and a Jaguar version could have been exact if Atari had invested in it.

 

 

Any 32 bit processor with an internal cache(even a small one like the 020) would have made a great improvemnt for other games that suffered in

frame rate such as HoverStrike, I-War, Cybermorph. Even later games like SkyHammer and even WTR would have had better frame rates with a

faster processor running at full clock and 32 bits with internal dynamic caching. Im telling you that the 68k even used sparingly can cause serious

bottle neck. It caches nothing, runs at half system speed and only 1/4 the bus width.

 

I think however that SH2's were probably more expensive than 020's were...not 100% though( the 68EC020 was a cheaper version than a normal

020 as it only used 24 bit addressing(which is no detriment for Jaguar anyway.)) Even a 68010 would have had a few bytes prefetch RAM and would

have shown a small but noticable performance boost. When you tie up the bus, you destroy the performance of Tom and Jerry.

 

The jaguar had to be successful at launch - in the window before the PSX/Saturn arrived, so the quality of the initial titles was way more important than the games that followed. Maybe Atari should have saved cash by not having a 68000 at all , and spent the money saved on a proper GPU compiler with main memory execution.

 

I cant remember the bottlenecks on WTR - but the rendering took most of the time :) - Lee finished it off on his own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So I've started this on other forums with other systems that didnt a get a chance and got some pretty intersting responses on how some people would've handled them. So any here it goes:

 

 

What would YOU have done differently when it came to Marketing/promoting/developing for the Atari Jaguar when it was first released?

In all honesty, run like hell and tried for a job at Sony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So I've started this on other forums with other systems that didnt a get a chance and got some pretty intersting responses on how some people would've handled them. So any here it goes:

 

 

What would YOU have done differently when it came to Marketing/promoting/developing for the Atari Jaguar when it was first released?

In all honesty, run like hell and tried for a job at Sony.

 

Quite a lot of Atari people ended up at Sony :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...